Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 157 references

Using failed supernovae to constrain the Galactic r-process element production

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Neutron star–black hole mergers, fed by failed supernovae at low metallicity, resolve the two long-standing puzzles of Galactic r-process enrichment: its presence at very low $[\mathrm{Fe/H}]$ and its large scatter there.

desk verdict A plausible and clearly argued case for BH-NS mergers as a second r-process site, but the central mechanism rests on an extreme low-metallicity failed-SN prescription that the paper tests only in one direction. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.05617 v1 pith:J4TPXVMI submitted 2019-08-15 astro-ph.GA

B. Wehmeyer , C. Frohlich , B. Côté , M. Pignatari , F.-K. Thielemann This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords r-processnucleosynthesisgalacticchemicalevolutionneutronstar-blackholemergerfailedsupernovaeuropiumabundancesmetal-poorhalostarscompactbinarymergersage-metallicityrelation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper sets out to explain two stubborn features of the Galaxy's heavy-element history: r-process elements appear in very metal-poor stars, and their abundance relative to iron scatters over two orders of magnitude at low metallicity while settling to a factor below three in the disk. It proposes that neutron star–black hole mergers act as a second r-process site alongside neutron star mergers. Because a black hole–neutron star merger needs only one prior supernova, it injects r-process material into gas polluted by a single iron source rather than two. The paper also assumes that at low metallicity many massive stars fail to explode, contributing no iron and slowing the metal-enrichment clock, which shifts the first r-process events to even lower $[\mathrm{Fe/H}]$. In the inhomogeneous chemical evolution code ICE, this combination qualitatively reproduces the observed europium abundances across Galactic history.

What carries the argument

The engine is the inhomogeneous chemical evolution code ICE, a $(2\,\mathrm{kpc})^3$ box divided into $100^3$ cells of 20 pc, run in 1 Myr timesteps, tracking individual stars, supernovae, and compact binary mergers rather than a smooth average. The load-bearing new ingredient is a simplified explodability prescription: stellar collapse outcomes come from the PUSH core-collapse supernova simulations at solar metallicity (failed explosions for $22.8\text{--}25.6\,M_\odot$), and at $\mathrm{Z} \le 10^{-2}\,\mathrm{Z}_\odot$ the authors test three extreme cases in which all stars above 20, 25, or $30\,M_\odot$ collapse directly to black holes, ejecting no iron. That prescription does two jobs: it suppresses iron production at low metallicity, slowing the $[\mathrm{Fe/H}]$ enrichment and shifting the age-metallicity relation, and it creates the black holes that allow BHNSMs—which, needing only one neutron star, inject r-process material into cleaner gas and produce a per-event $[\mathrm{Eu/Fe}]$ boost twice that of NSMs. Merger rates enter through an effective probability $P_{\mathrm{r-proc}} = 4\%$ per massive star, calibrated to about $1.03\times10^{-4}$ compact binary mergers per solar mass of stars formed, corresponding to roughly $1800\,\mathrm{Gpc}^{-3}\,\mathrm{yr}^{-1}$.

What would settle it

Run multi-dimensional core-collapse supernova simulations for stars between 30 and 50 solar masses at a metallicity one hundredth of solar and count how many successfully explode; if most explode, the model's low-metallicity iron suppression and early black hole–neutron star merger rate would disappear.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that "an adequate combination of neutron star mergers and neutron star-black hole mergers qualitatively reproduces the observed r-process abundances in the Galaxy." The simulation reproduces both troublesome observations: r-process-rich stars at very low $[\mathrm{Fe/H}]$ and the large $[\mathrm{Eu/Fe}]$ scatter at low metallicity that narrows in the disk. The mechanism has two prongs. A BHNSM requires only one core-collapse supernova to produce its neutron star, so its r-process ejecta land in gas enriched by half as much iron as a neutron star merger would require; and failed supernovae at low metallicity remove iron sources from the production chain, slowing the rise of $[\mathrm{Fe/H}]$ so that mergers can pollute nearly pristine gas. In the fiducial case (all stars above $30\,M_\odot$ failing at $\mathrm{Z} \le 10^{-2}\,\mathrm{Z}_\odot$), BHNSMs and NSMs contribute comparably at the earliest times, and BHNSMs then decline to about 10% of all compact binary mergers after about 400 Myr.

Load-bearing premise

The whole scenario hangs on the assumption that in the early, metal-poor Galaxy nearly all very massive stars—in the fiducial case every star above 30 solar masses—fail to explode and turn into black holes, contributing no iron; if most of them actually explode, the proposed early mergers would be too rare and too iron-polluted to match the data.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the scenario is right, neutron star–black hole mergers are a viable second r-process site, and the early europium enrichment does not require magnetorotational supernovae or collapsars.
  • The first r-process enrichment events can occur at substantially lower $[\mathrm{Fe/H}]$ than in neutron-star-merger-only models, because only one supernova has polluted the gas and failed supernovae have slowed iron production.
  • The transition from high, early scatter to the small scatter seen in disk stars follows naturally from BHNSMs being relatively frequent early and dropping to about 10% of compact binary mergers after roughly 400 Myr.
  • The required compact binary merger rate of about $1800\,\mathrm{Gpc}^{-3}\,\mathrm{yr}^{-1}$ is consistent with current gravitational-wave observations, so the model is not ruled out by them.
  • Because the r-process yield calculation ignores direct neutron star swallowing by black holes, the model's BHNSM merger rate is an upper limit and its gravitational-wave emission rate a lower limit; both are testable in future observations.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If future core-collapse simulations show that most stars of 30 to 50 solar masses at low metallicity still explode, the paper's iron-suppression mechanism weakens and the early r-process would need another iron-free source, such as magnetorotational supernovae.
  • The same logic predicts a specific abundance signature: the most r-process-enhanced very metal-poor stars should carry the iron pattern of a single prior supernova, which could be tested with detailed yields in the data.
  • Replacing the fixed merger delay times with distribution functions would redistribute BHNSM events in $[\mathrm{Fe/H}]$ and likely alter the scatter's shape above $[\mathrm{Fe/H}] \sim -1$; this is a natural next calculation, and the paper explicitly flags it as future work.
  • A decisive observational test is already feasible: if gravitational-wave observatories measure the black hole–neutron star merger rate far below roughly $1800\,\mathrm{Gpc}^{-3}\,\mathrm{yr}^{-1}$, the required efficiency of 4% per massive star would be in tension, and another early r-process site would be favored.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper presents inhomogeneous Galactic chemical evolution simulations using the ICE model to investigate neutron star-black hole mergers (BHNSMs) as an additional r-process site alongside neutron star mergers (NSMs). It introduces a metallicity-dependent failed-supernova prescription in which, at Z ≤ 10^-2 Zsun, all stars above a threshold mass (20, 25, or 30 Msun, depending on model) collapse to black holes without ejecting iron, and a probability Pr-proc = 4% for a massive star to end in a compact binary merger. The authors argue that BHNSMs require only one prior CCSN, and that the reduced Fe production from failed SNe shifts the age-metallicity relation to lower [Fe/H], together resolving the two issues of r-process enrichment at very low metallicity and the large observed [Eu/Fe] scatter. The simulated [Eu/Fe] distributions are compared visually with SAGA observations and claimed to be in qualitative agreement.

Significance. If the results hold, the paper would establish BHNSMs, enabled by failed supernovae, as a viable complementary r-process site and would connect stellar explodability theory to the Galactic r-process enrichment history. The paper's strengths include a detailed description of the inhomogeneous model, the use of recent PUSH explodability calculations, the explicit testing of three mass thresholds for low-metallicity failed SNe, and an honest discussion of the model's limitations and of the tension between the required CBM rate and LIGO/Virgo constraints. The main significance is however conditional: the central claim rests on an extreme step-function assumption for low-metallicity failed SNe and on visual rather than statistical agreement, so the conclusions currently have the status of a proof-of-concept rather than a robust constraint.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.2.3] The low-metallicity failed-SN prescription is the load-bearing element of the paper's resolution of the low-metallicity r-process problem, but it is an extreme step-function extrapolation: at Z ≤ 10^-2 Zsun all stars above 20, 25, or 30 Msun are assumed to collapse to black holes without ejecting Fe, whereas the only calculationally grounded input, the solar-metallicity PUSH runs, yields a narrow failed window of 22.8-25.6 Msun. The compactness scaling argument does not justify a sharp threshold because compactness is non-monotonic in progenitor mass. The three thresholds tested are all high-failed-fraction extremes; they do not bracket a realistic low-failed-fraction case. Since the early BHNSM rate and the age-metallicity shift scale directly with the failed fraction, the central claim is not yet robust. I request, at minimum, an additional model with a much smaller low-metallicity failed fraction (or a smooth mass-dependent failure probability) to test whether the qualitative agreement in Fig. 1 survives, and a quantitative statement of how the required Pr-proc would need to change.
  2. [Section 4.1, Fig. 1] The central claim of 'qualitative agreement' is based on visual inspection of the [Eu/Fe] vs [Fe/H] diagrams, with no statistical comparison (e.g., a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test or a quantification of the scatter ratio as a function of [Fe/H]) between models and observations. Moreover, since the ICE model is stochastic, a single realization per parameter choice is insufficient to establish whether the differences among the 20, 25, and 30 Msun threshold models are significant compared to run-to-run variations. Please provide a quantitative assessment, including multiple realizations or an estimate of the stochastic scatter.
  3. [Section 5(iv)] The paper is appropriately candid that the CBM probability Pr-proc = 4% is at the upper end of GCE rate estimates and corresponds to ~1800 Gpc^-3 yr^-1, within but near the edge of LIGO/Virgo constraints. The tension becomes stronger when combined with the low-metallicity failed-SN prescription: if the true failed fraction at low Z is lower than assumed, the early BHNSM rate decreases and either the r-process enrichment at low [Fe/H] is lost or Pr-proc must be pushed even higher. This coupling is not analyzed. A sensitivity study showing the allowed region in the (failed fraction, Pr-proc) plane that still reproduces the observed [Eu/Fe] distribution would materially strengthen the constraint claim in the title.
  4. [Section 5(v) and Section 4.2] The age-metallicity shift argument in Section 4.2 is presented as a central mechanism, but the model uses fixed coalescence times for CBMs, as acknowledged in Section 5(v), and no delay-time-distribution (DTD) cases are run. Because the shift is what allows r-process products to be injected at low [Fe/H], the authors should demonstrate that the qualitative conclusion is insensitive to the adopted coalescence times, or quantify how a DTD changes the low-metallicity onset. As written, the reader cannot tell whether the shift is a robust feature of the scenario or an artifact of the fixed-delay assumption.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 5] The first paragraph of Section 5 contains a duplicated word: 'can be explained explained' should read 'can be explained'.
  2. [Figure 1 caption] The caption should state explicitly which color corresponds to which threshold model (red for >20 Msun, green for >25 Msun, blue for >30 Msun) so that the figure is self-contained without reference to the text.
  3. [Sections 3.2.1-3.2.2] The definitions of low/intermediate mass stars are inconsistent: Section 3.2.1 defines LIMS as stars below 8 Msun, while Section 3.2.2 introduces IMS as stars in the range 1-10 Msun; please unify the nomenclature.
  4. [Section 3.2.4] The values PSNIa = 9×10^-4 and 7.49×10^-4 SNIa events per unit solar mass of stars formed are given without derivation or a supporting citation; a brief justification or reference would improve reproducibility.
  5. [Equation (4)] Please specify the base of the logarithms (presumably log10) and the units of the lifetime t (presumably Myr) in the text immediately following the equation.
  6. [Abstract] The abstract's phrase 'qualitatively reproduces' is weaker than the title's 'constrain'; consider aligning the claims, for example by adding a quantitative statement about the tested parameter ranges in the abstract.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the r-process rate and failed-SN prescriptions are stated inputs, and the [Eu/Fe] comparison is a forward model, not an inverse fit.

full rationale

I walked the derivation chain from Sections 3.2.3 and 3.2.4 through Section 4. The low-metallicity failed-SN thresholds (all stars above 20, 25, or 30 Msun failing at Z <= 10^-2 Zsun) are introduced explicitly as a 'simplified concept' and as three extreme cases for testing, not as a fit to the observed [Eu/Fe] data. The CBM probability Pr-proc = 4% is set by converting it to an event rate (~1800 Gpc^-3 yr^-1) and comparing it with LIGO/Virgo rates, not by matching Eu abundances. The resulting [Eu/Fe] distributions shown in Fig. 1 are forward-modeled consequences of these stated inputs; the paper never inverts the observed abundances to derive the rate or the thresholds. No load-bearing step reduces to a self-citation: the PUSH explodability calculations (Curtis et al. 2019; Ebinger et al. 2019) are external simulations used at solar metallicity, and the low-metallicity step function is acknowledged as an assumption rather than attributed to those papers. The age-metallicity shift and early BHNSM population follow from the definitions of failed SNe (no Fe ejection) and BHNSMs (one prior CCSN), but these are physical mechanisms, not circular identifications. The main caveat is that the conclusions are conditional on an extreme low-metallicity failed fraction and a high CBM rate; this is an assumption-dependence or robustness concern, not a circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central simulation depends on several inputs pulled from prior literature or chosen ad hoc: the CBM probability, the failed SN threshold, and the fixed delay times. These are honest modeling choices, but they mean the result demonstrates feasibility under specific assumptions rather than a unique prediction.

free parameters (2)
  • CBM formation probability P_r-proc = 4% (1.03e-4 CBM events per solar mass of stars formed)
    Set in section 3.2.4 to match the LIGO/Virgo merger rate (~1800 Gpc^-3 yr^-1); it directly controls the total r-process injection rate and is acknowledged to be at the upper end of allowed values.
  • Low-metallicity failed SN mass threshold = Fiducial: all stars > 30 Msun fail at Z <= 10^-2 Zsun; variants >20 and >25 Msun
    Chosen in section 3.2.3 from three extreme cases based on compactness scaling; directly sets the Fe production rate and BHNSM frequency at low metallicity.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Schmidt star formation law with density power alpha = 1.5 and Salpeter IMF slope -2.35
    Used in section 3.1 to set star formation rates and stellar mass sampling; standard in GCE modeling.
  • domain assumption BHNSMs eject comparable amounts of r-process matter to NSMs
    Adopted from Korobkin et al. (2012) in section 3.2.4; if BHNSM ejecta are much smaller, the scenario loses its quantitative support.
  • ad hoc to paper At Z <= 10^-2 Zsun, all stars above a threshold mass collapse to BHs without ejecting Fe
    Stated in section 3.2.3 as a 'simplified concept' because PUSH predictions at low metallicity are not yet available; load-bearing for the age-metallicity shift.
  • ad hoc to paper Fixed coalescence times for compact binary mergers instead of delay time distributions
    Acknowledged in section 5(v) as an over-simplification that mainly affects [Fe/H] > -1.
  • domain assumption SNIa Fe yields are independent of metallicity
    Used in section 3.2.2 with the caveat that it may be unrealistic but does not strongly affect the outcomes.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Using failed supernovae to constrain the Galactic r-process element production." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/J4TPXVMI

@misc{pith2026190805617,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Using failed supernovae to constrain the Galactic r-process element production},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/J4TPXVMI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.05617}
}
read the original abstract

Rapid neutron capture process (r-process) elements have been detected in a large fraction of metal-poor halo stars, with abundances relative to iron (Fe) that vary by over two orders of magnitude. This scatter is reduced to less than a factor of 3 in younger Galactic disc stars. The large scatter of r-process elements in the early Galaxy suggests that the r-process is made by rare events, like compact binary mergers and rare sub-classes of supernovae. Although being rare, neutron star mergers alone have difficulties to explain the observed enhancement of r-process elements in the lowest metallicity stars compared to Fe. The supernovae producing the two neutron stars already provide a substantial Fe abundance where the r-process ejecta from the merger would be injected. In this work we investigate another complementary scenario, where the r-process occurs in neutron star-black hole mergers in addition to neutron star mergers. Neutron star-black hole mergers would eject similar amounts of r-process matter as neutron star mergers, but only the neutron star progenitor would have produced Fe. Furthermore, a reduced efficiency of Fe production from single stars significantly alters the age-metallicity relation, which shifts the onset of r-process production to lower metallicities. We use the high-resolution [(20 pc)3/cell] inhomogeneous chemical evolution tool `ICE' to study the outcomes of these effects. In our simulations, an adequate combination of neutron star mergers and neutron star-black hole mergers qualitatively reproduces the observed r-process abundances in the Galaxy.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.05617 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Effect of the different choices of the prescriptions for failed SN at low metallicities on the GCE of [Eu/Fe]: Magenta crosses represent observations. Red (green, blue) squares repre￾sent GCE models where all stars > 20M (> 25M , > 30M ) at metallicites Z 6 10−2Z are forming failed SNe at the end of their life [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Locations of NSM/BHNSM events in the [Eu/Fe] vs. [Fe/H] space of our fiducial model (failed SNe for m > 30M at metallicity lower than Z 6 10−2Z ). Magenta crosses repre￾sent observations. Red squares represent all model stars. Green and blue squares are the locations where BHNSMs or NSMs oc￾cur, respectively. This allows us to determine at what point the different r-process events contribute to the Galactic r-proces… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Illustration of a shifted age-metallicity relation. Blue (red) squares represent model stars in a model that does (not) permit failed SNe. A model that permits failed SNe produces less Fe per time step, so the [Fe/H] enrichment is delayed in compar￾ison to a model which does not allow failed SNe. model where failed SNe are allowed, some stars collapse into a BH. This means that those stars do not contribute to the G… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

157 extracted references · 72 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    P., et al., 2017a Phys

    Abbott, B. P., et al., 2017a Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 161101

  2. [2]

    P., et al., 2017b ApJL 848, L12

    Abbott, B. P., et al., 2017b ApJL 848, L12

  3. [3]

    P., et al., 2017c ApJL 848, L13

    Abbott, B. P., et al., 2017c ApJL 848, L13

  4. [4]

    P., et al., arxiv.org/abs/1811.12907

    Abbott, B. P., et al., arxiv.org/abs/1811.12907

    arXiv

  5. [5]

    P., et al., arxiv.org/abs/1811.12940

    Abbott, B. P., et al., arxiv.org/abs/1811.12940

    arXiv

  6. [6]

    Arcones A., Thielemann F.-K., 2013 J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 40, 013201

    2013

  7. [7]

    and Qian, Y.-Z., 2004 A & A 416, 997–1011

    Argast, D., Samland, M., Thielemann, F.-K. and Qian, Y.-Z., 2004 A & A 416, 997–1011

    2004

  8. [8]

    Arnould, M., Goriely, S., Takahashi, K., 2007 Phys.Rep. 450, 97

    2007

Show all 157 references
  1. [9]

    S, et al

    Barklem, P. S, et al. 2005, A & A, 439, 129

    2005

  2. [10]

    Bauswein, A., Goriely, S., Janka, H.-T., 2013 ApJ 773 78

    2013

  3. [11]

    C., Holmbeck, E

    Beers, T. C., Holmbeck, E. M., Placco, V. M.; Hansen, T. T., Simon, J. D., Thompson, I., Frebel, A., Sakari, C. M., 2018 IAUS 334, 277B

    2018

  4. [12]

    Belczynski, K., Bulik, T., 1999 A& A 346, 91

    1999

  5. [13]

    L., Brown, D

    Belczynski, K., Klencki, J., Meynet, G., Fryer, C. L., Brown, D. A., Chruslinska, M., Gladysz, W., O'Shaughnessy, R., Bulik, T., Berti, E., Holz, D. E., Gerosa, D., Giersz, M., Ekstr\"om, S., Georgy, C., Askar, A., Wysocki, D., Lasota, J.-P., 2018 ArXiv 1706.07053v3

    2018 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Bi \'e mont, E., Karner, C., Meyer, G., Tr\"ager, F., zu Putlitz, G., 1982 A& A 107, 166 107, 166

    1982

  7. [15]

    Bisterzo, S., Travaglio, C., Gallino, R., Wiescher, M.,K\"appeler, F., 2014 ApJ 787, 10

    2014

  8. [16]

    Bravo, E., Domínguez, I., Badenes, C., Piersanti, L., Straniero, O., 2010 ApJL 711, L66-L70

    2010

  9. [17]

    L., Pilachowski, C

    Burris, D. L., Pilachowski, C. A., Armandroff, T. E., Sneden, C., Cowan, J. J., Roe, H., 2000 ApJ 544, 302B

    2000

  10. [18]

    Burrows, A., 2013 Rev. Mod. Phys. 85, 245

    2013

  11. [19]

    C., Skinner, M

    Burrows, A., Vartanyan, D., Dolence, J. C., Skinner, M. A., Radice, D., 2018 SSRv 214, 33

    2018

  12. [20]

    , 2016 PhRvD 1994 (8) 83504

    Carr , B., K \"u hnel , F., Sandstad , M. , 2016 PhRvD 1994 (8) 83504

    2016

  13. [21]

    2015 A & A 577, 139

    Cescutti, G., Romano, D., Matteucci, F., Chiappini, C., Hirschi, R. 2015 A & A 577, 139

    2015

  14. [22]

    Charbonnel, C., Meynet, G., Maeder, A., Schaller, G., Schaerer, D., 1993 A & AS 101, 415C

    1993

  15. [23]

    S., Nicholl, M., Villar, V

    Chornock, R., Berger, E., Kasen, D., Cowperthwaite, P. S., Nicholl, M., Villar, V. A., Alexander, K. D., Blanchard, P. K., Eftekhari, T., Fong, W., Margutti, R., Williams, P. K. G., Annis, J., Brout, D., Brown, D. A., Chen, H.-Y., Drout, M. R., Farr, B., Foley, R. J., Frieman,...

    2017

  16. [24]

    2018, MNRAS, 474, 2937

    Chruslinska, M., Belczynski, K., Klencki, J., Benacquista, M., 2018 MNRAS, 474, 2937 Benacquista, M. 2018, MNRAS, 474, 2937

    2018

  17. [25]

    G., Huang, W

    Cohen, J. G., Huang, W. 2009 ApJ, 701, 1053

    2009

  18. [26]

    L., Ritter, Ch., Paul, A., Wehmeyer, B., O'Shea, B

    C\^ot \'e , B., Belczynski, K., Fryer, C. L., Ritter, Ch., Paul, A., Wehmeyer, B., O'Shea, B. W., 2017 ApJ 836, 230C

    2017

  19. [27]

    J., Simonetti, P., Frebel, A., Fryer, C

    C\^ot \'e , B., Eichler, M.,; Arcones, A., Hansen, C. J., Simonetti, P., Frebel, A., Fryer, C. L., Pignatari, M., Reichert, M., Belczynski, K., Matteucci, F., submitted, arXiv:1809.03525

    arXiv

  20. [28]

    J., Thielemann, F.-K., Truran, J

    Cowan, J. J., Thielemann, F.-K., Truran, J. W., 1991 Phys. Rep. 208, 267

    1991

  21. [29]

    J., Sneden, Ch., Lawler, J

    Cowan, J. J., Sneden, Ch., Lawler, J. E., Aprahamian, A., Wiescher, M., Langanke, K., Martínez-Pinedo, G., Thielemann, F.-K., 2019 arXiv 1901.01410

    2019 arXiv

  22. [30]

    S., Berger, E., Villar, V

    Cowperthwaite, P. S., Berger, E., Villar, V. A., Metzger, B. D., Nicholl, M., Chornock, R., Blanchard, P. K., Fong, W., Margutti, R., Soares-Santos, M., et al., 2017 ApJ, 848 (2), 10

    2017

  23. [31]

    ohlich, C., Hempel, M., Perego, A., Liebend\

    Curtis, S., Ebinger, K., Fr\"ohlich, C., Hempel, M., Perego, A., Liebend\"orfer, M., Thielemann, F.-K., 2019 ApJ 870, 2

    2019

  24. [32]

    E., 2002 MNRAS 332, 91

    Dolphin, A. E., 2002 MNRAS 332, 91

    2002

  25. [33]

    2012 ApJ 759, 52

    Dominik, M., Belczynski, K., Fryer, C., et al. 2012 ApJ 759, 52

    2012

  26. [34]

    Duch \^e ne, G., Kraus, A., 2013 Ann. Rev. A & A 51, 269

    2013

  27. [35]

    Ebinger, K., PhD thesis, 2017 edoc.unibas.ch

    2017

  28. [36]

    ohlich, C., Hempel, M., Perego, A., Liebend\

    Ebinger, K., Curtis, S., Fr\"ohlich, C., Hempel, M., Perego, A., Liebend\"orfer, M., Thielemann, F.-K., 2019 ApJ 870, 1

    2019

  29. [37]

    Ebinger, K., et al., in preparation

  30. [38]

    N., 1989 Nature 340, 126

    Eichler, D., Livio, M., Piran, T., Schramm, D. N., 1989 Nature 340, 126

    1989

  31. [39]

    Rauscher, T., Rosswog, S., Winteler, C., Zinner, N

    Eichler, M., Arcones, A., Kelic, A., Korobkin, O., Langanke, K., Martinez-Pinedo, G., Panov, I. Rauscher, T., Rosswog, S., Winteler, C., Zinner, N. T., Thielemann, F.-K. 2015 ApJ 808, 30E

    2015

  32. [40]

    E., Sukhbold, T., Ugliano, M., 2016 ApJ 818, 124

    Ertl, T., Janka, H.-Th., Woosley, S. E., Sukhbold, T., Ugliano, M., 2016 ApJ 818, 124

    2016

  33. [41]

    Fran c ois, P. et al. 2007 A & A, 476, 935

    2007

  34. [42]

    2018 Ann

    Frebel, A. 2018 Ann. Rev. Nuc. Part. Sci., vol. 68, iss. 1, 237

    2018

  35. [43]

    Freiburghaus, C., Rosswog, S., Thielemann, F.-K., 1999 ApJ 525 L121

    1999

  36. [44]

    ohlich, C., Martinez-Pinedo, G., Liebend\

    Fr\"ohlich, C., Martinez-Pinedo, G., Liebend\"orfer, M., Thielemann, F.-K., Bravo, E., Hix, W., Langanke, K., Zinner, N., 2006 PRL 96 14 142502

    2006

  37. [45]

    ohlich, C., Hauser, P., Liebend\

    Fr\"ohlich, C., Hauser, P., Liebend\"orfer, M., Martínez-Pinedo, G., Thielemann, F.-K., Bravo, E., Zinner, N. T., Hix, W. R., Langanke, K., Mezzacappa, A., Nomoto, K. 2006 ApJ 637 415-426

    2006

  38. [46]

    Fujimoto, S., Hashimoto, M., Kotake, K., Yamada, S., 2006 Origin of Matter and Evolution of Galaxies 847, 386-388

    2006

  39. [47]

    Fujimoto, S., Nishimura, N., Hashimoto, M., 2008 ApJ 680 1350-1358

    2008

  40. [48]

    D., and Wands, D., 1996 Phys

    Garcia-Bellido, J., Linde, A. D., and Wands, D., 1996 Phys. Rev. D 54,6040

    1996

  41. [49]

    Garcia-Bellido, J., 2018 PoS(EDSU2018) 042

    2018

  42. [50]

    V., Wallerstein, G., Gonzalez, G., Charbonnel, C., 2005 AJ, 129, 1428

    Geisler, D., Smith, V. V., Wallerstein, G., Gonzalez, G., Charbonnel, C., 2005 AJ, 129, 1428

    2005

  43. [51]

    P., Levan, A

    Gompertz, B. P., Levan, A. J., Tanvir, N. R., Hjorth, J., Covino, S., Evans, P. A., Fruchter, A. S., González-Fernández, C., Jin, Z. P., Lyman, J. D., Oates, S. R., O'Brien, P. T., Wiersema, K., 2018 ApJ 860, 62G

    2018

  44. [52]

    Greggio, L., A & A 441, 1055-1078

  45. [53]

    Halevi, G., and M\"osta, P., 2018 MNRAS 477 (2), 2366

    2018

  46. [54]

    T., Holmbeck, E

    Hansen, T. T., Holmbeck, E. M., Beers, T. C., Placco, V. M., Roederer, I. U., Frebel, A., Sakari, C. M., Simon, J. D., Thompson, I. B., 2018 ApJ 858, 92H

    2018

  47. [55]

    J., & Kobayashi, C., 2019 MNRAS 483, 5123

    Haynes, C. J., & Kobayashi, C., 2019 MNRAS 483, 5123

    2019

  48. [56]

    and Fryer , C

    Heger , A. and Fryer , C. L. and Woosley , S. E. and Langer , N., Hartmann , D. H. , 2003 ApJ 591, 288H

    2003

  49. [57]

    R., Fujii , M

    Hirai , Y., Ishimaru , Y., Saitoh , T. R., Fujii , M. S., Hidaka , J., Kajino , T. , 2015 ApJ 814, 41

    2015

  50. [58]

    Hirschi, R., Meynet, G., Maeder, A., 2005 A & A 443, 581

    2005

  51. [59]

    Hirschi, R., 2007 A& A 461, 571

    2007

  52. [60]

    R., Nichols, D., Duez, M., Kidder, L

    Hinderer, T., Nissanke, S., Foucart, F., Hotokezaka, K., Vincent, T., Kasliwal, M., Schmidt, P., Williamson, A. R., Nichols, D., Duez, M., Kidder, L. E., Pfeiffer, H. P., Scheel, M. A., 2018 arXiv:1808.03836

    2018 arXiv

  53. [61]

    J., Arcones, A., C\^ot\'e, B., Dillmann, I., Nazarewicz, W., Roederer, I

    Horowitz, C. J., Arcones, A., C\^ot\'e, B., Dillmann, I., Nazarewicz, W., Roederer, I. U., Schatz, H., Aprahamian, A., Atanasov, D., Bauswein, A., Bliss, J., Brodeur, M., Clark, J. A., Frebel, A., Foucart, F., Hansen, C. J., Just, O., Kankainen, A., McLaughlin, G. C., Kelly, J...

    2018 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Hotokezaka, K., Beniamini, P., Piran, T., 2018 J of Mod. Phys. D 27, 1842005

    2018

  55. [63]

    Ishimaru, Y., Wanajo, S., Prantzos, N., (2015) ApJL 804L 35I

    2015

  56. [64]

    1999, ApJS 125 439-462

    Iwamoto, K., Brachwitz, F., Nomoto, K., et al. 1999, ApJS 125 439-462

    1999

  57. [65]

    2016 Ann

    Janka, H.-T., Melson, T., Summa, A. 2016 Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 66, 341

    2016

  58. [66]

    Janka, H.-T., 2017 in Handbook of Supernovae, Springer International Publishing

    2017

  59. [67]

    P., Frebel , A., Chiti , A., Simon , J

    Ji , A. P., Frebel , A., Chiti , A., Simon , J. D. , 2016 Nature 531, 610

    2016

  60. [68]

    X., Herwig, F., Paxton, B., Toki, H., Suzuki, T., Martínez-Pinedo, G., Lam, Y

    Jones, S., Hirschi, R., Nomoto, K., Fischer, T., Timmes, F. X., Herwig, F., Paxton, B., Toki, H., Suzuki, T., Martínez-Pinedo, G., Lam, Y. H., Bertolli, M. G., 2013 ApJ 772, 150J

    2013

  61. [69]

    A., Goriely, S., and Janka, H.-T., 2015 MNRAS 448, 541

    Just, O., Bauswein, A., Pulpillo, R. A., Goriely, S., and Janka, H.-T., 2015 MNRAS 448, 541

    2015

  62. [70]

    Kalogera, V., Kim, C., Lorimer, D.R., Burgay, M., D'Amico, N., Possenti, A., Manchester, R.N., Lyne, A.G., Joshi, B.C., McLaughlin, M.A., Kramer, M., Sarkissian, J.M., Camilo, F., 2004 ApJ 601 L179-L182

    2004

  63. [71]

    K\"appeler, F., Gallino, R., Bisterzo, S., Aoki, W., 2011 RvMP 83, 157

    2011

  64. [72]

    Kasen, D., Metzger, B., Barnes, J., Quataert, E., Ramirez-Ruiz, E., 2017 Nature 51, 80K

    2017

  65. [73]

    Kennicutt, R. C. Jr., 1998 ApJ 498:541

    1998

  66. [74]

    N., Cohen, J

    Kirby, E. N., Cohen, J. G., Guhathakurta, P., Cheng, L., Bullock, J. S., Gallazzi, A., 2013 ApJ 779, 102

    2013

  67. [75]

    & Nakasato, N., 2011 ApJ 729, 16K

    Kobayashi, C. & Nakasato, N., 2011 ApJ 729, 16K

    2011

  68. [76]

    2016 ApJ 830, 76

    Komiya, Y., & Shigeyama, T. 2016 ApJ 830, 76

    2016

  69. [77]

    Korobkin, O., Rosswog, S., Arcones, A., Winteler, C., MNRAS 2012 426 1940-1949

    2012

  70. [78]

    Larson, R., 1991 ASPC 20 571L

    1991

  71. [79]

    Lattimer , J. M. and Schramm , D. N. , 1974 ApJ 192, L145

    1974

  72. [80]

    Letarte, B., Hill, V., Tolstoy, E., Jablonka, P., Shetrone, M., et al., 2010 A & A 523 A17

    2010

  73. [81]

    C., & Nomoto, K., 2018 ApJ 861, 143

    Leung, S. C., & Nomoto, K., 2018 ApJ 861, 143

    2018

  74. [82]

    Liebend\"orfer, M., Mezzacappa, A., Messer, O. E. B., Martinez-Pinedo, G., Hix, W. R., Thielemann, F.-K., 2003 Nuc Phys A 719 C144-C152

    2003

  75. [83]

    & Chieffi, A., 2006 New Astron

    Limongi, M. & Chieffi, A., 2006 New Astron. Rev. 50, 474

    2006

  76. [84]

    & Chieffi, A., 2006 ApJ 647, 483

    Limongi, M. & Chieffi, A., 2006 ApJ 647, 483

    2006

  77. [85]

    & Chieffi, A., 2018 ApJS 237, 13

    Limongi, M. & Chieffi, A., 2018 ApJS 237, 13

    2018

  78. [86]

    L., Carnero Rosell, A., Carrasco Kind, M., Carretero, J., Cunha, C

    Marshall, J., Hansen, T., Simon, J., Li, T., Bernstein, R., Kuehn, K., Pace, A., DePoy, D., Palmese, A., Pieres, A., Strigari, L., Drlica-Wagner, A., Lidman, C., Nagasawa, D., Bertin, E., Brooks, D., Buckley-Geer, E., Burke, D. L., Carnero Rosell, A., Carrasco Kind, M., Carret...

    arXiv

  79. [87]

    Matteucci, F., & Greggio, L., 1986 A & A 154, 279M

    1986

  80. [88]

    2014, MNRAS 438, 2177

    Matteucci, F., Romano, D., Arcones, A., Korobkin, O., Rosswog, S. 2014, MNRAS 438, 2177

    2014

  81. [89]

    2013 ApJ 778,149

    McWilliam, A., Wallerstein, G., Mottini, M. 2013 ApJ 778,149

    2013

  82. [90]

    & Vanbeveren, D., 2014 A & A 564, A134

    Mennekens, N. & Vanbeveren, D., 2014 A & A 564, A134

    2014

  83. [91]

    M\"osta, P., Richers, S., Ott, C.D., Haas, R., Piro, A.L., Boydstun, K., Abdikamalov, E., Reisswig, C., Schnetter, E., 2014 ApJL 785 L29

    2014

  84. [92]

    D., Radice, D., Roberts, L

    M\"osta, P., Ott, Ch. D., Radice, D., Roberts, L. F., Schnetter, E., Haas, R., 2015 Nature 528, 376M

    2015

  85. [93]

    L., Kere s , D., Faucher-Gigu \`e re, C.-A., Hopkins, P

    Muratov, A. L., Kere s , D., Faucher-Gigu \`e re, C.-A., Hopkins, P. F., Quataert, E., Murray, N. 2015, MNRAS, 454, 2691

    2015

  86. [94]

    Nishimura, N., Sawai, H., Takiwaki, T., Yamada, S., Thielemann, F.-K., 2017 ApJ 836, L21

    2017

  87. [95]

    Nomoto, K., Kobayashi, C., Tominaga, N., 2013 ARA& A 51, 457N

    2013

  88. [96]

    A., 2018 J Phys G Nuc Phys 45 (8), 084001,

    Obergaulinger, M., Just, O., Aloy, M. A., 2018 J Phys G Nuc Phys 45 (8), 084001,

    2018

  89. [97]

    R., McCullough, P

    O'Dell, C. R., McCullough, P. R., Meixner, M., 2004 AJ 128, 2339

    2004

  90. [98]

    Ojima, T., Ishimaru, Y., Wanajo, S., Prantzos, N., François, P., 2018 ApJ 865, 87

    2018

  91. [99]

    1986 ApJ 308, L43

    Paczynski, B. 1986 ApJ 308, L43

    1986

  92. [100]

    V., Korneev, I

    Panov, I. V., Korneev, I. Yu., Thielemann, F.-K., 2008 AL 34 189-197

    2008

  93. [101]

    ohlich, C., Ebinger, K., Eichler, M., Casanova, J., Liebend\

    Perego, A., Hempel, M., Fr\"ohlich, C., Ebinger, K., Eichler, M., Casanova, J., Liebend\"orfer, M., Thielemann, F.-K., 2015 ApJ 806, 275

    2015

  94. [102]

    Pillepich, A., Springel, V., Nelson, D., et al., 2018, MNRAS, 473, 4077

    2018

  95. [103]

    E., Buras, R., Janka, H.-T., Hoffman, R

    Pruet, J., Woosley, S. E., Buras, R., Janka, H.-T., Hoffman, R. D. 2005 ApJ 623 325-336

    2005

  96. [104]

    D., Woosley, S

    Pruet, J., Hoffman, R. D., Woosley, S. E., Janka, H.-T., Buras, R., 2006 ApJ 644 1028-1039

    2006

  97. [105]

    S., Balick, B., Hajian, A

    Reed, D. S., Balick, B., Hajian, A. R., Klayton, T. L., Giovanardi, S., Casertano, S., Panagia, N., Terzian, Y., 1999 ApJ 118 2430–2441

    1999

  98. [106]

    A., M\"uller, E., 2016 MNRAS 460, 3316R

    Rembiasz, T., Guilet, J., Obergaulinger, M., Cerdá-Durán, P., Aloy, M. A., M\"uller, E., 2016 MNRAS 460, 3316R

    2016

  99. [107]

    et al., 2012 ApJ 755 89

    Ren, M. et al., 2012 ApJ 755 89

    2012

  100. [108]

    U., Cowan, J

    Roederer, I. U., Cowan, J. J., Karakas, A. I., Kratz, K.-L., Lugaro, M., Simmerer, J., Farouqi, K., Sneden, Ch., 2010 ApJ 724, 975R

    2010

  101. [109]

    et al., 2014 ApJ 784 158

    Roederer, I.U. et al., 2014 ApJ 784 158

    2014

  102. [110]

    et al., 2014 AJ, 147 136

    Roederer, I.U. et al., 2014 AJ, 147 136

    2014

  103. [111]

    et al., 2014 MNRAS 445 2970

    Roederer, I.U. et al., 2014 MNRAS 445 2970

    2014

  104. [112]

    Rosswog, S., 2013 Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A:20120272

    2013

  105. [113]

    Astrophysics, Vol

    Rosswog, S., 2015 Living Reviews in Comp. Astrophysics, Vol. 1 (1) 1, 109

    2015

  106. [114]

    Rosswog, S., Korobkin, O., Arcones, A., Thielemann, F.-K., Piran, T., 2014 MNRAS 439 744-756

    2014

  107. [115]

    M., 2018 A& A 615, 132R

    Rosswog , S., Sollerman , J., Feindt , U., Goobar , A., Korobkin , O., Wollaeger , R., Fremling , C., Kasliwal , M. M., 2018 A& A 615, 132R

    2018

  108. [116]

    G., Aoki, W., Norris, J

    Ryan, S. G., Aoki, W., Norris, J. E., Beers, T. C., 2005 ApJ 635, 349R

    2005

  109. [117]

    & Yamada, S., 2016 ApJ 817, 153S

    Sawai, H. & Yamada, S., 2016 ApJ 817, 153S

    2016

  110. [118]

    Schmidt, M.: 1959 ApJ, 121: 161

    1959

  111. [119]

    Schaerer, D., Meynet, G., Maeder, A., Schaller, G., 1993 A & AS 98, 523S

    1993

  112. [120]

    Schaerer, D., Charbonnel, C., Meynet, G., Maeder, A., Schaller, G., 1993 A & AS 102, 339S

    1993

  113. [121]

    Schaller, G., Schaerer, D., Meynet, G., Maeder, A., 1992 A & AS 96, 269S

    1992

  114. [122]

    R., Ciaraldi-Schoolmann, F., Röpke, F

    Seitenzahl, I. R., Ciaraldi-Schoolmann, F., Röpke, F. K., Fink, M., Hillebrandt, W., Kromer, M., Pakmor, R., Ruiter, A. J., Sim, S. A., Taubenberger, S., 2013 MNRAS 429 1156

    2013

  115. [123]

    J., Ramirez-Ruiz, E., Madau, P., Mayer, L., Guedes, J., 2015 ApJ 807 115

    Shen, S., Cooke, R. J., Ramirez-Ruiz, E., Madau, P., Mayer, L., Guedes, J., 2015 ApJ 807 115

    2015

  116. [124]

    B., 2001 PASP 113 1122

    Shetrone, M., C\^ot\'e, P., Stetson, P. B., 2001 PASP 113 1122

    2001

  117. [125]

    A., Tolstoy, E., Primas, F., Hill, V., Kaufer, A., 2003 AJ125 684

    Shetrone, M., Venn, K. A., Tolstoy, E., Primas, F., Hill, V., Kaufer, A., 2003 AJ125 684

    2003

  118. [126]

    M., Barnes, J., Metzger, B

    Siegel, D. M., Barnes, J., Metzger, B. D., 2018 arXiv 181000098S

    2018

  119. [127]

    Simmerer, J., et al., 2004 ApJ 617 1091

    2004

  120. [128]

    J., & Gallino, R

    Sneden, C., Cowan, J. J., & Gallino, R. 2008 Ann. Rev. Astron. & Astroph. 46, 241

    2008

  121. [129]

    J., Boschman, L., Venn, K

    Starkenburg, E., Hill, V., Tolstoy, E., Franois, P., Irwin, M. J., Boschman, L., Venn, K. A., de Boer, T. J. L., Lemasle, B., Jablonka, P., Battaglia, G., Groot, P., Kaper, L., 2013 A & A 549 88

    2013

  122. [130]

    Suda, T., Katsuta, Y., Yamada, S., Suwa, T., Ishizuka, C., Komiya, Y., Sorai, K., Aikawa, M., Fujimoto, M.Y., 2008 PASJ 60 1159-1171

    2008

  123. [131]

    Suda, T., Yamada, S., Katsuta, Y., Komiya, Y., Ishizuka, C., Aoki, W., Fujimoto, M.Y., 2011 MNRAS 412 843-874

    2011

  124. [132]

    E., Brown, J

    Sukhbold, T., Ertl, T., Woosley, S. E., Brown, J. M., Janka, H.-T., 2016 ApJ 821, 38S

    2016

  125. [133]

    Takahashi, K., Witti, J., Janka, H.T., 1994 A & A 286 857-869

    1994

  126. [134]

    A., Tominaga, N., Yoshida, M., Sekiguchi, Y., Morokuma, T., Motohara, K., Ohta, K., Kawabata, K

    Tanaka, M., Utsumi, Y., Mazzali, P. A., Tominaga, N., Yoshida, M., Sekiguchi, Y., Morokuma, T., Motohara, K., Ohta, K., Kawabata, K. S., Abe, F., Aoki, K., Asakura, Y., Baar, S., Barway, S., Bond, I. A., Doi, M., Fujiyoshi, T., Furusawa, H., Honda, S., Itoh, Y., Kawabata, M., ...

    2017

  127. [135]

    R., Levan, A

    Tanvir, N. R., Levan, A. J., González-Fernández, C., Korobkin, O., Mandel, I., Rosswog, S., Hjorth, J., D'Avanzo, P., Fruchter, A. S., Fryer, C. L., et al., 2017 ApJ 848, 27

    2017

  128. [136]

    M., Kramer, M., Freire, P

    Tauris, T. M., Kramer, M., Freire, P. C. C., Wex, N., Janka, H.-T., Langer, N., Podsiadlowski, Ph., Bozzo, E., Chaty, S., Kruckow, M. U., van den Heuvel, E. P. J., Antoniadis, J., Breton, R. P., Champion, D. J., 2017 ApJ 846, 170T

    2017

  129. [137]

    Thielemann, F.-K., Brachwitz, F., H\"oflich, P., Martinez-Pinedo, G., Nomoto, K., 2004 New Astronomy Reviews 48 605-610

    2004

  130. [138]

    appeli, R., Liebend\

    Thielemann, F.-K., Arcones, A., K\"appeli, R., Liebend\"orfer, M., Rauscher, T., Winteler, C., Fröhlich, C., Dillmann, I., Fischer, T., Martinez-Pinedo, G., Langanke, K., Farouqi, K., Kratz, K.-L., Panov, I., Korneev, I. K., Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 66 346-353

  131. [139]

    Thielemann, F.-K., 2015 Nature Physics, Vol. 11, Iss. 12, 993

    2015

  132. [140]

    V., Wehmeyer, B., 2017 Ann

    Thielemann, F.-K., Eichler, M., Panov, I. V., Wehmeyer, B., 2017 Ann. Rev. Nuc. Part. Sci. 67, 253

    2017

  133. [141]

    Thielemann, F.-K., Diehl, R., Heger, A., Hirschi, R., Liebend\"orfer, M., ``Massive Stars and their Supernovae, in: Astrophysics with Radioactive Isotopes, Astrophysics and Space Science Library 453, Springer 2018

    2018

  134. [142]

    X., Brown, E

    Timmes, F. X., Brown, E. F., Truran, J. W., 2003 ApJ 590 L83-L86

    2003

  135. [143]

    Travaglio, C., Hillebrandt, W., Reinecke, M., 2005 A & A, 443 1007-1011

    2005

  136. [144]

    Ugliano, M., Janka, H.-Th., Marek, A., Arcones, A., 2012 ApJ 757 (1)

    2012

  137. [145]

    F., Keres D., Faucher-Giguere, C.-A., 2015 MNRAS 447, 140

    van de Voort F., Quataert E., Hopkins P. F., Keres D., Faucher-Giguere, C.-A., 2015 MNRAS 447, 140

    2015

  138. [146]

    A., Guillochon, J., Berger, E., Metzger, B

    Villar, V. A., Guillochon, J., Berger, E., Metzger, B. D., Cowperthwaite, P. S., Nicholl, M., Alexander, K. D., Blanchard, P. K., Chornock, R., Eftekhari, T., Fong, W., Margutti, R., Williams, P. K. G., 2017 ApJ 851, 12

    2017

  139. [147]

    Wanajo, S., 2006 ApJ 647 1323W

    2006

  140. [148]

    Wanajo, S., 2013 ApJL 770 L22

    2013

  141. [149]

    Wanajo, S., Sekiguchi, Y., Nishimura, N., Kiuchi, K., Kyutoku, K., Shibata, M., 2014 ApJL 789, L39

    2014

  142. [150]

    Wang, H., Zhang, F.-W., Wang, Y.-Z., Shen, Z.-Q., Liang, Y.-F., Li, X., Liao, N.-H., Jin, Z.-P., Yuan, Q., Zou, Y.-C., Fan, Y.-Z., Wei, D.-M., 2017 ApJL 851, L18

    2017

  143. [151]

    , 2015 MNRAS 452, 1970

    Wehmeyer , B., Pignatari , M., and Thielemann , F.-K. , 2015 MNRAS 452, 1970

    2015

  144. [152]

    appeli, R., Perego, A., Arcones, A., Vasset, N., Nishimura, N., Liebend\

    Winteler, C., K\"appeli, R., Perego, A., Arcones, A., Vasset, N., Nishimura, N., Liebend\"orfer, M., Thielemann, F.-K., 2012 ApJ 750 L22

    2012

  145. [153]

    T., Korobkin, O., Fontes, C

    Wollaeger, R. T., Korobkin, O., Fontes, C. J., Rosswog, S. K., Even, W. P., Fryer, C. L., Sollerman, J., Hungerford, A. L., van Rossum, D. R., Wollaber, A. B., 2018 MNRAS, 478, 3298

    2018

  146. [154]

    E., Wilson, J

    Woosley, S. E., Wilson, J. R., Mathews, G. J., Hoffman, R. D., Meyer, B. S., 1994 ApJ 433 229-246

    1994

  147. [155]

    E., Heger, A., Weaver, T

    Woosley, S. E., Heger, A., Weaver, T. A., 2002 RvMP 74, 1015

    2002

  148. [156]

    E., & Heger, A., 2007 PhR 442, 269

    Woosley, S. E., & Heger, A., 2007 PhR 442, 269

    2007

  149. [157]

    Yamada, S., Suda, T., Komiya, Y., Aoki, W., Fujimoto, M.Y., 2013 MNRAS 436 1362-1380

    2013

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.